On Friday’s Breitbart News Daily, Peter Schweizer, author of Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, discussed the Freedom of Information Act suit filed by VICE News demanding copies of the FBI’s communications between him and Breitbart News.

Schweizer told SiriusXM host Alex Marlow the suit was another example of how “they don’t want to look at the explanation of what happened on Election Night.”

“It’s gotta be something else. This is going to be the next iteration of it. You’ve got VICE News and individuals that are suing the FBI, and basically, their premise is that the FBI played a pivotal role in Hillary Clinton losing because of James Comey’s letter and discussions about the investigation of the Clinton Foundation,” he said.

“So the FBI is really what now lost the election for Hillary Clinton, and that we – we meaning Breitbart, Government Accountability Institute, the book Clinton Cash – had an oversized influence on the FBI. So it’s not a case of the Russians tilting the election; it’s a question now of Breitbart and the Government Accountability Institute manipulating the FBI into investigating Hillary Clinton, which is what threw the election,” Schweizer said.

“So, you know, add to the list of the great accomplishments of the team that we are now capable of manipulating the largest and most professional law enforcement agency in the United States,” he added humorously.

Marlow suggested there might also be a dash of bitter envy from other media outlets toward Breitbart News at play.

“I think that’s part of it, too,” Schweizer agreed. “Look, what Breitbart has done with its coverage, and what Government Accountability Institute, what we’ve done in our research – as a lot of people know, we’re sister organizations – what we have done is, we have really produced relevant, hard-hitting fact and news that have actually influenced and affected people.”

“That’s a good thing. That’s what news organizations are supposed to do,” he contended. “They’re supposed to present information in a way that moves individuals. If you look through the history of American journalism, whether it’s Woodward and Bernstein or other people that have broken news – that’s been the goal of news.”

“When you look at a lot of the entities that are out there today, they kind of regurgitate or resurface the same stories, but they’re really not having an effect,” he noted. “Some of them have had in the past, or have right now, these pretty lofty valuations, and they haven’t really proven with their journalism that they’re worth it.”

“So, again, it goes to the issue, if somebody else is making you look bad, maybe the thing to do is to attack them and try to bring them down a notch, rather than improve the product that you yourself are actually putting together,” Schweizer concluded.